Sunday, November 4, 2012

Massachusetts Massacre

Harvard 69 Columbia 0

Why Harvard Won
The Crimson defensive line dominated the game, logging eight sacks, forcing three interceptions and a QB fumble. On offense, Harvard's passing attack was excellent, averaging an incredible 9.2 yards per attempt.

Why Columbia Lost

The Lions did almost nothing right. Six turnovers and no answering for the Crimson's pass rush doomed them early on.

Key Turning Point

-Both teams went three and out on their first possessions, but on Columbia's second possession the Lion got one first down and made it all the way to their 47 before an incomplete pass ended the drive. After the punt, Harvard took over on their own 23 and drove down the field in just seven plays for the TD. The game was over.

Columbia Positives

Seriously?

Columbia Negatives

The team seemed to regress on every category. One can only hope Super Storm Sandy had something to do with what looked like an unprepared team.

Columbia MVP

I wouldn't insult any of our players by naming them the MVP of this debacle.

What We've Learned

At a time when so many people just four miles from my home are suffering terribly because of Sandy, I am loathe to call this game a disaster.

But what other name can there be?

I was troubled all week by Head Coach Pete Mangurian's talk about playing more of the young players and no talk about actually winning. I sense that the team internalized that message and the results are obvious.

Mangurian has rightfully spoken a number of times about how the players' have a steep learning curve in this program. Well, as any longtime Columbia fan can tell you, so do the head coaches. A precious few of our coaches have figured it out over the years, and the jury is out for 2-3 more years on whether Mangurian will be one of them.

Of course, the players can't be let off the hook here either. Bottom line, most of them did not execute anywhere near as well as they have been all season. A 69-0 loss is not the result of just bad play calling or bruised morale.

Now the real test comes. Will the Lions tank the final two games of the season or come back fighting for real against Cornell and Brown?

The answer to that question will be a more important measuring stick for Mangurian and his staff than the way the younger players perform now and in the future.

48 comments:

There was a rumor that Needham High's varsity switched uniforms with Harvard... Since we're playing so many Freshman/Soph. they wanted to level the playing field... and we STILL lost!

Keep up with your strategy Coach, maybe Cornell will throw up 70+ and not put in their 4th string too.

Only Harvard keeps score of a scrimmage.

Coach Murphy: Hey, who hasn’t played and wants to Letter this year? Post game news conference: “I honestly felt badly that we scored that many points,” Murphy said. “We’re not trying to run it up, but we had a lot of guys in there who had never played before and were trying to take as much time off the clock as we could, and we just busted a couple plays.”

Diane has now selected three LOSERS - Shoop, Wilson, and now Mangurrian. Question: which unemployed ex-Cornell coach will get the job next from another exhaustive "National" search (of upstate NY).

If NYU brings back football, will they be better than us in 5 years? Regretfully, the answer is probably "yes". the good news would be that we would only have to travel downtown to see wins.

Could the CU Rugby team have fared better than our Lions? Probably yes. Heck, they couldn't have done any worse.

Jake, I agree with almost everything you are saying, with one exception. You don't throw young players who aren't ready to the wolves while simultaneously throwing your seniors under the bus. Pulling Brackett was wrong. Banishing some seniors was wrong. Playing young guys on the OL and DL against a team like Harvard was wrong. I truly hope I will eat my words.

The Seniors are the ones suffering here because of this guy's ego. RE: underclassmen... (most) of us thought that giving up the JV program was a mistake. yesterday was one of THE most embarrassing losses in CU history. We wern't remotely competitive from a coaching, or playing, standpoint.

I would agree that Coaches don't fumble, drop basses, or miss tackles. However, putting an ill prepared team out there to get embarrassed like that is squarely on their shoulders. This underclassmen approach is a proven failure; wake up!

I have been following Columbia football for about five years and am amazed at the lack of school spirit and support. I never see the fans really getting into the games and wonder if that affects the players. Looks to me that the most support the players get is here.

Here is the article in the Crimson... Notice the excerpt I took from the article... Their 4th String RB had 121 yards! If we were losing by THAT many points, why didn't we empty the bench anmd let players like Senior Nick Gerst play? Oh, that's right, two Freshmen and a Soph are ahead of him and he didn't even travel. Keep up the good work Coach!

"No matter who was on the field, Harvard executed in all facets of the game. First-string quarterback Colton Chapple threw three first-half touchdown passes and ran for another, second-string middle linebacker Connor Luftus returned an interception for a score, third-string safety Donova Celerin had a late fumble recovery, and fourth-string running back Damani Wilson ran for 121 yards and two scores in a contest in which nearly everyone on the active roster chipped in for the win."

The Harvard Varsity Club is now upset with us... now 3/4ths of the team earned a letter based on yesterday's game. The other quarter were on crutches, but could have lettered anyway...

I didn’t see the game yesterday but know that we had a lot of players that didn’t even make the trip. I overhear players and fans and they say it is a disgrace the way the newbies are favored. The newbies have yet to prove themselves and are propped up while the older guys are used as tackling dummies. The older guys want to buy in but the coaches just want to break the habit of being losers by letting the new guys show the way. Looks like that didn’t happen yesterday. Too bad because it looked like we had some talent the past few years but the play calling was terrible. Now it looks like the calls are OK - except for trying to run up the middle with a puny line - but we put inexperienced guys in. I saw another post where someone said we can’t spread the field but that isn’t so – routinely we have a guy open deep but he never gets looked at. We also need to keep our tight end just that – tight. He can help the O line a lot better than lining him up wide. And why not try a wildcat? Brackett can scramble and Garrett can run so you can freeze the D line from just plowing our small O line backwards and shutting down any drop back passing. And what’s with everyone being skinny? Real football is played by fat guys in the trenches with the skinny models getting all the headlines!

You know what Doc, I'll be there too. I'm just naive enough to think that Mangurrian is the guy. Some may say that it's too early, however, he is a cross between Garrett and Shoop... And hose aren't good comparisons!

It's difficult to wish the players so much success when this Coach and is Staff are out of touch with reality!

Just as the rest of you do, I feel awful about this loss to Harvard. I really feel for the alum,all the regular bloggers, Jake and the parents. I feel sick for the team though. Not at all in agreement that they quit or even thought about giving up. Sure they were upset(I am guessing) about the screwing that Shawn Brackett got yesterday, but quit? I don't think so. Do you seriously think they wanted a blow-out like this.Do you really see them wanting to be the laughing stock of the league? Doubt that. What really bothers me is that they put in so much time daily, practice, meetings then more practice and meetings. What time they have left is for studying and sleep. So pleaase don't say they quit. They wanted a win more than any of us.

If we get blown out the next two weeks Dianne should be sent packing. She is all show and zero substance. As far as school spirit goes, put a competitive and indeed winning product on the field, well coached and motivated, and the crowds will be there. A few weeks ago, Mangurian basically said that he doesn't intend to play to win but to build for the future. Something a out the sacrifices the upperclassmen will be making for the future success of the program. But this is a team which should have beaten both Penn on the road and Dartmouth at home with more imaginative and better coaching. So why did they completely collapse yesterday? My opinion is that pulling Brackett after two series showed a total lack of judgment.

PS, Coach just tweeted. Something about back to work,today. No time for the faint of heart. So I am going to suspend my sense of reality and pull just as hard as I can for this group. I fully expect to be there this Saturday.

It seems that Mangurian is destroying what Wilson built. Maybe he thinks he needs to in order to get the program over the 4-6/5-5 hump. He reversed Wilson's retention initiative, and he seems to have undone Wilson's progress in buildiing on-field talent. The cupboard was not this bare when Wilson left. Even when he was playing with Shoop's recruiting classes in years 2 and 3, Wilson didn't allow his players to get embarrassed like this. And there is no comparison with Campbell's Rutgers debacle. Rutgers had been stepping up to big time football in recruiting, scheduling, etc. Not so here. Another comparison: after last season's QB-less Dartmouth debacle, CU played Yale tough and went down to the wire in the Blizzard Game. Interesting to see how Mangurian does preparing our guys for next week.I hope we can look back on this as the bad old days, but I haven't had a good feeling about this coaching regime. Hopefully Mangurian is leading a learning organization, but he has been too doctrinaire and cliched in his public face, and his ego is getting in the way. Unless this game is proven a one-off aberration, Mangurian will have taken the program a giant step backward in his first year. Next we'll hear Wilson get blamed for it, and that would heap travesty on top of last year's unfairness. I'll be watching the Cornell game hoping to be proved wrong. If we can bounce back, it would change so much!

It is unfortunate to be a Senior in a situation like this. I saw how it effected Srs who played for Garrett and then the following year when we played for the fraud, McElreavy.

The reality is that if the coach thinks the program needs a massive transition that is his call but also his risk if it does not turn around in year 2 or 3.

I just hope Mangurian is treating them with respect and making sure they feel like they are part of the family, wanted and needed. McElreavy made the Seniors feel like unwanted losers and hung us out to dry. It took many of us years before we wanted anything to do with CU football.

I hope Mangurian is the right guy but I am also disappointed that he has not taken Norries' lead with regard to reaching out to alumni and including them.

Frankly, Norries did more to rekindle disenfranchised former players than any CU coach since I was there in the early 80's. he communicated with us, told us we were all part of the family, and made us feel welcome again. he sent us periodic emails, had a weekly email to us during the season, and was did a great job knowing and recognizing us at CU events.

Mangurian is entitled to do it his way but it is a shame all the strides Norries made in bringing us back seem to have been ignored. I think he missed a great opportunity.

Of course, winning makes all of our dissatisfaction go away very quickly...

LionEsq- With all due respect, the Harvard loss is far worse than the Rutgers loss because we are supposed to be on a level playing field.

Wilson and his Staff were a cancer to this program; especially the way they spoke to, and treated, the kids. They had to go, and they should have been gone 1-2 years earier! Mangurrian is a coaching narcissist who is not in touch with reality. His hubris to play underclassmen who are clearly not ready is setting this program back years. Wilson was a good recruiter, so the cupboard was (is) not bare. These kids are coached poorly and playing kids who are not ready causes internal unrest with the current team. If you are a Jr./Sr., forget it with this guy!

Diane is equally, if not more-so, responsible here! Her football, basketball and men's soccer coaching selections are a disaster. Her exception is he baseball coach.

If we lose the next two games and are embarrassed, we need to contact President Bollinger dictly to act on this. Diane needs to go! Maybe he sports psychologist she hired on her staff (without a degree in psychology, or clinical experience), should spend more time with Diane.

Anonymous, if you reread my post you'll see that I was saying that the Harvard not comparable to the Rutgers loss for the reason you said, I just said it differently. As for the rest of your post, you've got some facts wrong. Most importantly, your suggestion that Wilson and his staff abused their players, while circulated online, is just wrong. If you knew him and his assistants, and their apprach to team-building, you would know that could not be true. And if you look at the caliber of the uptick in recruiting and the miracle reversal of CU's decades-long attrition problem, you would have to deduce that the systemic abuse you suggest cannot possibly be true. Finally, if you attended practice occasionally, you would have seen no evidence of it. Moreover, the university would not have tolerated it. And if it had been so, the staff would not have been snapped up by other schools after the changeover. So please put that smear to rest. And, by the way, I've seen members of the current staff run on the field and get into a player's face as he was coming off the field after a mistake, with no one complaining. That's not abuse - that's coaching.Also, you're being grossly unfair to Coach Smith, but that's for another website. He's making good progress. Uncritical negativism won't help the situation in any sport.

Anonymous, that may sound harsher than I intended. I certainly sympathize with your frustration, and I share it. We all do. But as Doc Jock will tell you, a wrong diagnosis won't lead to a cure (unless you are far luckier than Columbia is in athletics.

LionEsq- you are more than entitled to your opinion. I respect that. If you ever run in to Brackett, just ask him how he, and the rest of the team were berated. Unfortunately, my note was not a smear, rather fact.

Jake hears from the parents, I am sure that he can attest to what happened under the Wilson administration. Jake, if you don't mind, please respond to LionEsq off-line. If I m wrong, my apologies. If not, lesson learned LionEsqu-

Re: Basketball... Yes, point taken, another time/place. By now, we should be in the top of the league. We are nowhere close. That math is simple...

There was physical abuse by one coach who got away with it because the players didn't want to be blackballed. One player who was choked in practice quit the team and left it at that. There are other examples. I have many witnesses to these events.

Basketball-consensus top three pick. Same team that took H to the wire twice, only stronger. Smith can coach and recruit. Last word on Wilson: in 2009 before the Lafayette game we had the best team in the Ivies, just ask the Lafayette guys. MA was playing lights out, as was Gross. We had Kennedy and Miller. We had a D1 player in Knowlin, best WR in the Ivies. All were Wilson's players. Then the injury bug hit and it was downhill from there. The only coach from that era who seemed to have been genuinely disliked was Vinnie Marino. I really liked Norries and was terribly disappointed when the wheels came off the wagon last year. PS, we played Harvard probably tougher than anybody in the Ivies last year. Except for the Brackett-less game at Hanover, and a very bad second half at Ithaca, we were never blown out or embarrassed last year. Had we fired Vinnie we could have kept Norries.

This guy was/is supposed to be an X's and O's coach. Well, losing by 69 should never happen to that kind of coach.This isn't for the faint of heart? Dude, try decades of losing and then come talk to me about the faint of heart. He has an ego problem and the kids are paying for it.We have yet to come to a game being as prepared as we should be which equates to bad coaching.To the players, keep the heads up as you have a lot of support.To the coach, find another profession.

Guys ... we are "dialing it up" right now .... I'll admit, I was overly optimistic when I saw the incoming class ... I even figured a few (3-5) would start .... but even if they were good as I suspected, they were only freshman who were moving up from places where they were above-average versus the talent they played against to a league with lots of above-average talent ... we hired Mangurian to do a job ... he has been given the OK to do it HIS way ... he was not hired to be OUR friend or best bud ... whatever his personality, his record will do the talking for him ... sure we could have had a couple of more wins with the talent we had plus the incoming freshmen, but, I believe Mangurian has a 3-yr plan, not a 1-yr plan ... we don't see it or understand it especially after an embarassing defeat ... like it or not we have to hang in there and give it time .... not because we like Mangurian, but because we want to see Columbia become a winner ... I feel for the Seniors .... we went 1-8 my senior year for a coach in his second year .... in his 4th year he was 6-3 and we finished in 3rd place in the Ivy League ... this will take time no matter how we rant ...

Jake makes a point when he muses about whether the storm could have affected preparation. I'd like to think that this, along with the fact that we played a lot of underclassmen, and the caliber of the opponent led to a "perfect storm." Still, no excuse for that type of shellacking! I'm hoping everyone looks at themselves in the mirror and feels a little embarrassed and angry and comes out flying this Saturday.

Red Tiger, You are obviously more patient than the majority here, probably because it has been a long wait for a successful season.I hope you are wrong that it could take 3 more years to see more wins, and that the present soph.,juniors and seniors are the sacrifice. I know there have been coaches that have turned programs around in less than 3 years. I am not saying get rid of Coach Mangurian, just saying I hope he can turn things around soon.

We have more than a program to turn around here. We have a culture of apathy and incompetence. We've been awful for decades. Tellier is regarded as a genius by some and he had only a couple of winning seasons....

I wish Mangurian were better with his PR but he deserves 3 years at least...

PS, gues who was,our coach when we were last blown out by the identical 69-0 score? Hint: we just named the new sports center after him. But there was a huge difference, insofar as Rutgers was going big time and the Sovern/Cole administration (the traitors who sold off the Allen Pavillion property) had even less interest in or support for football than the current crew. Lee, wake up, the alumni who support the university are the College alums. Look at the giving day results, College and Athletics led the way, and we are tired of being humiliated in the showcase sport.

I agree with Anonymous ... I want to see us win sooner than 3 yrs .... especially since most of us believe we should have 2-3 more wins this year ... then 69-0 came along ... hence my 3 yr tome ... Cornell has been up and down so far this year, passing for lots of yardage but not scoring ... this weekend we have another shot if the kids will forget this past week .... they have to play hard and believe they can win ...

Since we had a very successful "Giving Day" by the University, I proposed that we, as fans of Columbia Athletics, have a "Accountability Day" after the football season is over. We need to voice our opinion (loudly) to Bollinger. Thoughts???

Unfortunately, it is impossible to make any intelligent comments regarding this Columbia Football Team or Coach Mangurian because none of us are privy to any information at all regarding the players. For example, neither the coaches nor the sports information people have told us what happened to some of the highest rated recruits, namely Davison, Napier and Stock, none of whom are currently listed on the roster. Also, there has been no information on the status of Gross, the superb wide receiver who was injured early in the season. And what about Mike Gerst, and several others, Surely, things would have been different if just two or three of these freshmen were playing. I believe that the failure of the Columbia Sports Information people to do their job and publish regular positive stories on the players has undermined the transition to the new coaching staff. I'm not sure who is responsible for this and whether Coach Mangurian just simply does not want publicity of any kind, but in my opinion, it is a huge mistake not to comment positively on the team and its players every day beginning at least sixty days before the season begins. Only one person has written anything either positive or even informational about the Columbia Football Team and that is Jake. And to the best of my knowledge Jake does not get paid one cent for anything he does for Columbia Football. I wonder if others agree with me that the complete lack of favorable publicity on the Columbia Football Team is a major problem. If so, I wish other would say so on this blog and to Dr. Murphy and Coach Mangurian. Let's say some good things about our Columbia Lions and say them often!

the only thing that has undermined the new coaching staff coming in is the new coaching staff and the way the coach was selected. oh, and the way the team seemingly has not been prepared for many games and the way we just got trounced like a bug on a windshield.on saying some good things, Columbia is consistent, consistently making the wrong choices, consistenly the administration treats the prospects of having a winning sports program and history as a passing fancy even as you the supporters have shown your devotion to be otherwise. that we consistently hire poor coaches who do not have the full package (ability to recruit, good coaching acumen, and the ability to communicate and motivate).the more things change the more they stay the same.

Communicating with fans as to why certain players are on or not on the field won't make the team more competitive or win more games. The games against Princeton and Harvard are stark reminders of just how far we are from competing in this league. This has not escaped the coaches or the players. We will see the true metal of both as we close out this season. Finally, this system has been rocked. It will not produce a league leader in 2 yrs. Do you hold the fort, make some tweaks or overhaul. Tough decisions for the boss. Lets see if he earns his record breaking salary. I am pulling for him with all my heart, for the sake of the men on the team, but for the first time have some doubts.

I was at the game, played and have watched many many teams over the last three decades. The first thing tgat struck me was how small our o- line is. I know this was done intententially by the staff to keep us " fresh for longer" but they were manhandled all day and outweighed by their Harvard counterparts by 50 lbs per man. Secondly, players were hanging their heads at 14-0- body language was awful and I only saw one or two players visibly trying to rally the troops and put up some fight. Harvard was vastly superior talent and size wise but we could have competed better if we eliminated mistakes and stuck with the senior leaders of the team longer in the game.

I look for us to rebound on all fronts vs Cornell this weekend. If we don't , i think that speaks volumes on what is going on behind the scenes.

I have not been exposed or seen enough of the team to argue with you but how can you say Mangurian does not have the full package at this point? He did a pretty good job at Cornell, and with additional years in the nfl would seem to pass the look test at first glance.

At his first press conference Coach M said that he is going to try to win every game. Really? When did that change? Herm Edwards famously said you play to win the game. So what changed? What led him to conclude that the players who gave several years to the program should be denied the chance to compete to win? I just don't believe that you throw seniors under the bus in order to put 18 year olds up against grown men who are much, much bigger and stronger. The problem, however, is that Dianne couldn't care less and is tolerated because her boss regards athletics as a necessary evil in the path toward his global one world university.

Re: Annonymous who brought to our attention (again) how small, outweighed and manhandled our O-Line was (is) against the more physically and mentally mature line of EVERYONE in the league... Watch out, the sheep who will blindly follow Mangurrian will vilify you!

Where is the Hot Dog Committee on all of this? Has anybody received communication from them, other than "we need more money to run a successful program."

What Mangurrian has done to these Seniors is shameful, simply shameful! That is NOT the Columbia way. let Gerst and the rest of he Seniors play!

The college game has clearly passed Mangurrian by... I just hope we don't have to endure this mediocrity for six years like we had to do with Norris.

WOFi think there is a misconception about what the coach did at Cornell and in the Pro's. he was 500 at Cornell and largely done with other coaches talent.in the Pro's i do not believe, although could be wrong, that he was ever elevated to a position of coordinator and certainly not head coach.500 in my eyes, Columbia or not, is not a highly successful coach. 500 by definition is average.just my opinion

He went 1-6 in the Ivies his first season at Cornell and then 10-4 his last two seasons there. He was a coordinator with Atlanta...

I agree with you that .500 is not where we want to be. None of us know for sure how he will end up but he has a good resume, especially for an Ivy coach.

I've heard some question his ability to recruit, 3 years at Cornell is probably too short of a time period to fairly assess that. Does he have the personality to sell kids on CU? Time will tell. While we all compare him to Garrett his personality seems more McElreavy than Garrett to me. Garrett could charm you, Mac not so much....

I only met him briefly once and while he said all the right things, he didn't seem terribly interested in meeting me or talking to me even though I am a former player from the darkest years. Norries was the exact opposite and made us all feel like we were family..

I've been most disappointed with his seeming minor interest in reaching out to alums and former players... Thus far, he seems like the kind of guy who just wants to coach and not deal with the public stuff, that could be a disaster...

WOFsorry, i signed out before writing PigPen.he was not liked by his players, that is first hand from former players not just at the collegiate level but also at the pro level. one player went so far to say if he saw him coming down the street he would not even say a word to him and this guy started.i met the guy, found him to be a total turn off and as a former player walked away thinking he is going to have a tough time at CU.

I hear you - I met M last Summer I was surprised at how insincere he came actross. But every successful coach has former players that don't like him. I know former players who disliked Paterno, who dislike Bagnoli, who dislike Andy Talley at Villanova.

Bagnoli's personality is not going to warm your heart but he has been extremely successful.

We still have to give M two or three years unless something ridiculous happens - and I don't mean a bad loss...